no title

Other viewpoints: Senate aims too low on debt

About our Editorials

Dispatch editorials express the view of the
Dispatch editorial board, which is made up of the publisher, the president of
The Dispatch, the editor and the editorial-writing staff. As is the traditional newspaper
practice, the editorials are unsigned and intended to be seen as the voice of the newspaper.
Comments and questions should be directed to the
editorial page editor.

Also in Opinion

Subscribe to The Dispatch

Already a subscriber?
Enroll in EZPay and get a free gift!
Enroll now.

Wednesday March 20, 2013 5:28 AM

There is no one alive more revered and beloved among Democrats than Bill Clinton, who showed at last year’s national convention what a rock star he is.

One of his most historic achievements as president was something that eluded Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush: balancing the federal budget. For Democrats, it was cause for great pride.

But that was a long time ago. Last week, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray, D-Wash., produced a budget plan — the first one to come from the Senate in four years.

She did so soon after House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., unveiled his.

The two blueprints have many differences, but the biggest of all is that Ryan’s aims at eliminating the annual federal deficit by 2023. Murray’s would balance the budget … well, never. In 2023, the Democratic budget’s deficit would be $566 billion. Over the coming decade, her plan would add $5.2 trillion to the total debt — more than four times the $1.2 trillion the Ryan version would add.

The House GOP approach has been criticized on several grounds — making excessive cuts in domestic discretionary spending, promising lower income-tax rates without specifying how the lost revenue would be made up and relying on the repeal of Obamacare, which is not going to happen anytime soon. But you can’t fault Ryan’s budget for aiming too low.

The Democrats, unfortunately, are feigning fiscal responsibility instead of practicing it. They would boost outlays by 58 percent over the coming decade. The renewed spending binge explains why the Democratic plan’s annual deficits would remain high despite its tax increases designed to bring in nearly $1 trillion in additional revenue.

As a share of the economy, the debt Democrats envision would hardly shrink at all — going from 77 percent of gross domestic product this year to 70 percent in 2023. The Republicans, by contrast, would slash it to less than 55 percent of GDP — much closer to the historical norm.

Democrats say their approach is more than adequate because there’s nothing magic about having a balanced budget. They think the important thing is merely to “stabilize” the debt — that is, to keep it from ballooning any more as a share of the economy.

But after the recent explosion of the national debt — now approaching a staggering $17 trillion — that’s not good enough, as nonpartisan research groups such as the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget keep warning.